• Datz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    I’m not a hardware guy, how is this different from the Steam Deck? Is the hardware here used of crappy quality by comparison? I thought most people liked the Deck (and everyone in here, I thought this is general Linux for a second), I sure do and will likely use it for a decade.

      • Datz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        Well I know that, but isn’t that good in the context of waste (OP’s problem)? Since PS6 hasn’t been released yet, it’s seems the PS5-like specs here will last a decade and be future proof enough. PS4 is almost 13 years old and still has games coming out. The Switch 2 is PS4 level and it seems to be successful for now, and Steam Deck was aiming for that benchmark too.

        (You can tell I’m a tech idiot by how I measure power in Playstations)

        • SparroHawc@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 minutes ago

          The difference is in the form factor. The Steam Deck is a purpose-built device for handheld gaming, with the expectation that it won’t be useful for AAA games that push current PC hardware. It’s found that niche and serves very, very well there. For that reason, it will likely outlive its tech specs - it will continue to work for many lower-spec indie games, because expectations will be reasonable.

          The Steam Machine, on the other hand, is positioned as something that can play all current games (that aren’t kernel-level DRMed to hell and back, at least). These become outdated the moment new games start coming out that run poorly on it. Since it’s not upgradeable, the whole device becomes outdated and will need to be replaced if you want to play the next new hotness at a good FPS.